Aim of work: The aim of this work is to study prevalence of abnormal
gas troesophageal reflux (GE)?) by pH recording in cirrhotic patients with
esophageal varices and without previous encioscopic treatment and its
possible predicting factors. Patients and Methods: Sixty five patients
(38 men. 27 women) with liver cirrhosis, were selected from those adi nitted
at the Internal Medicine Department of Benha University Hospitals.
Their ages ranged from 38 to 59 years (with a mean age of 54.4+10.5
yoctrs). Diagnosis of liver cirrhosis was based on clinical, laboratory. abdominal
ultrczsonographic image and histological findings. All patients
had esophageal varices confirmed by endoscopy and were submitted to a
questionnctire about typical gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms
theurtburn and or acid regurgitation). pH recording was performed with
the probe placed 5 cm above the superior lower esophageal sphincter limit,
as determined by manometry. Abnormal pH reflux (pH)?) was defined
as percentage total time with pH < 4 was greater than 4.5%. Results:
The pH recording demonstrated abnormal pHR in 25 patients (38.5%): 6
(24%) just in upright position. 9 (36%) in supine position and 10 (40%) in
both positions. Regarding the caliber of the esophageal winces (EV). 15
patients (44.1%) out of 34 with small size varices. 6 patients (31.6%) out
of 19 patients with medium size varices and 4 patients (33.3%) out of 12
patients with large size varices. had abnormal p1-1R. There was no statistical
signcant difference between patients with small variceal size and
abnormal reflux and those with medium and large variceal sizes (P> 0.05
respectively). As ibr patients with congestive gastropathy, 10 of them
(34.5%) out of 29 had abnormal pH)? and 15 patients (41.7%) without congestive
gastropathy out of 36 had abnormal pH)?. There was no sra-tistical signyicant difference between patients with congestive gastropa
thy and abnormal reflux and those without (P >0.05). Regarding the severity
of the disease as assessed by Child Pug classgication., 13 patients
(35.1%) out of 37 patients with Child's A. 5 patients (41.7%) out of 12 with
Child's B and 7 patients (43.8%) out of 16 with Child's C had abnormal
pHR. There was no statistical significant difference between patients with
Child's A and abnormal reflux and those with Child's B and Child's C
(P>0.05 respectively). As for ascites, 12 of them (42.9%) out of 28 patients
presented with an abnormal pHR and 13 patients (35.1%) out of 37 patients
without ascites had abnormal pHR. There was no statistical significant
difference between patients with ascites and abnormal reflux and
those without ascites (P>0.05). Also, no statistical significant difference
was found between patients with severe ascites and abnormal reflux and
those with mild and moderate degree of ascites (P>0.05 respectively).
Thirty five patients (53.8%) had typical reflux symptoms, 19 of them
(54.3%) presented with abnormal pHR and 6 (20%) out of 30 patients
without typical rejlwc symptoms had abnormal pHR. There was a statistical
significant difference between patients with typical reflux symptoms
and abnormal reJlaz and those without typical reflux symptoms (Pc 0.05).
Regarding the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure, there was no
statistical signcant difference in the mean levels of the LES pressure between
neither the severity of the diseas( as assessed by Child's A. B &
C), degree of ascites, grades of EV nor the normal and abnormal reflux
disease (P80.05 respectively). Conclusion: The prevalence of abnormal
gastroesophageal reflux was high (38.5%) in patients with hepatic cirrhosis
and esophageal varices. Only typical gastroesophageal reflux disease
symptoms predicted these findings. Recommendation: Long-term ambulatory
follow-up of this group of patients is important, since, if the "erosive"
theory holds true, patients with abnormal reflux could present a
higher incidence of variceal bleeding. This, however, needs to be demonstrated. |
